The President and clergy are getting it all wrong on abortions

By Edga Sichangi

Why are we getting it all wrong with the debate on abortion?

Last Saturday, President Kibaki said the new constitution is not going to include anything contrary to the ideals of the Bible. Responding to John Cardinal Njue’s request that abortion provisions should not be included in the document, the President told the Cardinal that the MPs understood his call. The assertion to knock out provisions for safe abortions from the new constitution is contrary to the earlier pledge that the Prime Minister and the President are not going to publicly comment on the substance of the new constitution.

While most countries in Africa have some of the most stringent laws outlawing abortion correspondingly it is in Africa where mortality as a result of abortions is highest, contributing up to 60 per cent of the whole world.

It is with this backdrop that members of the cloth, and in this context the President too, should stop burying their heads in the sand and accept the reality that women are aborting in drones. Most of these abortions result in complications and the most pitiful deaths. If indeed the Church were interested in the right to life then they would let persons in the medical fraternity to determine the issue.

The Constitution is a living instrument that is supposed to protect the lives, property and liberty of its citizens. The persons who die as a result of complications arising from abortions should also be protected and they, too, have a right to life as enshrined in the proposed constitution and it is the duty of the State to zealously and jealously protect this fundamental human right.

Expectant mothers

There are those who have argued that by categorically stating that life begins at conception this would tie the hands of doctors from performing a simple procedure on an expectant mother. In such a case if the foetus "dies" then the burden of proof as to whether it was an illegal abortion or a miscarriage lies with the woman. If this goes unchecked the innocent woman who would have lost a baby could easily be prosecuted. This is not within the spirit of the Constitution.

Parliamentarians and even more importantly the Church should have an open mind in dealing with these issues and instead of taking a confrontational approach it’s my belief that finding common ground is of absolute necessity. A woman in Nicaragua was diagnosed with metatastic cancer. While seeking medical attention, it was discovered she was pregnant. The hospitals denied her treatment since that would jeopardise her pregnancy. In Nicaraguan laws termination of a pregnancy is a crime. In this context the woman’s life is also meaningless.

The prohibition includes cases where the woman’s life is in danger or where the pregnancy is a result of rape or incest.

The Committee of Experts ably put it that in some circumstances abortion should be allowed, but that life begins at conception. Isn’t this a good enough middle ground? Abortion for the sake of it should be heavily penalised. But like the case of the Nicaraguan woman it should be permitted within the law.